https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77291
--- Comment #3 from Richard Biener ---
Author: rguenth
Date: Mon Dec 18 08:33:26 2017
New Revision: 255775
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=255775&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2017-12-18 Richard Biener
PR middle-end/77291
* tre
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77291
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Known to work|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81877
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to work||8.0
Summary|[7/8 Regression]
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81877
--- Comment #16 from Richard Biener ---
Author: rguenth
Date: Mon Dec 18 08:35:23 2017
New Revision: 255776
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=255776&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2017-12-18 Richard Biener
PR tree-optimization/81877
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83322
--- Comment #6 from Markus Trippelsdorf ---
Ping? This issue causes segfaults with a checking=release compiler...
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82825
--- Comment #1 from Jakub Jelinek ---
So, the first question is what kind of system support this needs, when it
changed in between darwin11 and darwin17.
As the macro is guarded with #ifndef, I suppose we could override it from
configure for aff
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82975
--- Comment #3 from Martin Liška ---
Ramada do you still need the output of 'gcc -v' or you have enough information?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83440
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||ice-on-valid-code
Status|UN
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83457
Bug ID: 83457
Summary: Add fhost-simt-vf
Product: gcc
Version: 8.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: enhancement
Priority: P3
Component: libgomp
Assignee:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83444
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |6.5
--- Comment #2 from Richard Biener
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83448
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |8.0
Summary|ice in
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82675
David Binderman changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||dcb314 at hotmail dot com
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83452
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83454
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
Compo
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83455
--- Comment #1 from Richard Biener ---
/* PR target/32219 */
/* { dg-do run } */
/* { dg-require-visibility "" } */
/* { dg-require-effective-target weak_undefined } */
/* { dg-options "-O2 -fPIC" { target fpic } } */
extern void foo () __attrib
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83200
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83200
--- Comment #2 from Martin Liška ---
(In reply to Martin Liška from comment #1)
> Makes reasonable the patch, let me take a look.
* s/Makes/Looks
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81778
--- Comment #5 from Tom de Vries ---
See PR83457 - "Add fhost-simt-vf" for a way to reproduce this bug on x86_64.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81778
--- Comment #6 from Tom de Vries ---
This is essentially:
...
diff --git a/gcc/omp-expand.c b/gcc/omp-expand.c
index 2c28682..3990998 100644
--- a/gcc/omp-expand.c
+++ b/gcc/omp-expand.c
@@ -4327,6 +4327,18 @@ expand_omp_simd (struct omp_region *
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81778
--- Comment #7 from Tom de Vries ---
A point fix could look like:
...
diff --git a/gcc/omp-expand.c b/gcc/omp-expand.c
index 3990998..2439a89 100644
--- a/gcc/omp-expand.c
+++ b/gcc/omp-expand.c
@@ -4339,6 +4339,26 @@ expand_omp_for_static_chunk
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83438
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords|needs-bisection |
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83266
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83189
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||hubicka at gcc dot gnu.org,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83436
--- Comment #5 from Daan van Vugt ---
Okay, turned out I missed the critical lines in my bug report...
Could you try again with this example?
module mod_random_seed
implicit none
contains
!> Read an int from /dev/urandom
subroutine read_u
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79392
--- Comment #6 from Martin Liška ---
After what was said, can we close it as invalid?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79392
--- Comment #7 from Stephen Kitt ---
(In reply to Martin Liška from comment #6)
> After what was said, can we close it as invalid?
Yes, please do.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83410
--- Comment #8 from Richard Biener ---
So it's SCOP detection failing in
/* Check for unstructured control flow: CFG not generated by structured
if-then-else. */
if (bb->succs->length () > 1)
{
edge e;
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83189
--- Comment #4 from Jakub Jelinek ---
This is in:
/* Ensure that the frequencies in the loop match the new estimated
number of iterations, and change the probability of the new
exit edge. */
freq_h = loop->header->count;
freq_e
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79392
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83458
Bug ID: 83458
Summary: F2008: inquire fails on units opened with newunit=
Product: gcc
Version: 7.2.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82447
--- Comment #8 from amker at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Let's track the missed candidate [-128, 0] issue in PR78427.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80709
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82614
--- Comment #14 from Martin Liška ---
(In reply to PeteVine from comment #13)
> Almost certainly not related, but there's been some sort of regression in
> gcov-dump from GCC 8 branch. Trying to dump any *.gcda file (ver. 8
> included) ends like
Configured with: ../configure --enable-languages=c,c++ --disable-multilib
--disable-bootstrap --target=arm-unknown-linux-gnueabi
Thread model: posix
gcc version 8.0.0 20171218 (experimental) (GCC)
$ ./cc1 -fpreprocessed di-longlong64-sync-1.i -mflip-thumb -mcpu=arm10tdmi
-mtls-dialect=gnu -marm -march
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82975
ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P2
Last reconfirmed|2017-
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81126
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |NEW
Summary|[6/7/8 Regression]
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78918
Christophe Lyon changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||clyon at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83239
Christophe Lyon changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||clyon at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83420
--- Comment #2 from Andreas Krebbel ---
Author: krebbel
Date: Mon Dec 18 11:31:06 2017
New Revision: 255777
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=255777&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
S/390: PR83420: Improve hotpatch option parsing.
With the attached pa
bin/x86_64-pc-linux-gnu-as --disable-libstdcxx-pch
--prefix=/repo/gcc-trunk//binary-trunk-255776-checking-yes-rtl-df-extra-nobootstrap-nographite-amd64
Thread model: posix
gcc version 8.0.0 20171218 (experimental) (GCC)
Tested revisions:
r255776 - ICE
r255386 - ICE
7-branch r255536 - OK
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82209
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83460
Bug ID: 83460
Summary: [8 regression] FAIL: g++.dg/pr79095-4.C
Product: gcc
Version: 8.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: middle-end
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83446
--- Comment #6 from H.J. Lu ---
(In reply to Martin Sebor from comment #5)
> With r255772 the false positive should no longer be issued. Please open a
> new bug if any further problems crop up during the i686 bootstrap as a
> result of r255758,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83330
--- Comment #6 from Zdenek Sojka ---
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #1)
> (In reply to Zdenek Sojka from comment #0)
> > Also, I do not understand why bar() is apparently inlined, when the function
>
> bar isn't inlined. Instead ipa-pu
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82975
ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83461
Bug ID: 83461
Summary: [8 regression] Segmentation fault on __attribute__
with multiple inheritance
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83461
Markus Trippelsdorf changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83322
Markus Trippelsdorf changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||sylvestre at debian dot org
--- Co
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83116
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned a
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83239
--- Comment #18 from Christophe Lyon ---
(In reply to Christophe Lyon from comment #17)
> (In reply to Martin Sebor from comment #15)
> > Author: msebor
> > Date: Sat Dec 16 22:37:22 2017
> > New Revision: 255753
> >
>
> Hi,
> After this patch,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82209
--- Comment #7 from Jeffrey Walton ---
(In reply to Eric Gallager from comment #6)
> (In reply to Eric Gallager from comment #5)
> > (In reply to Jeffrey Walton from comment #4)
> > > This is kind of weird... When we tested with C++03 by adding -
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83375
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83392
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83462
Bug ID: 83462
Summary: [8 regression] c-c++-common/Warray-bounds-3.c fails on
arm-none-eabi
Product: gcc
Version: 8.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83446
Christophe Lyon changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||clyon at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83463
Bug ID: 83463
Summary: [8 Regression] ICE: tree check: expected integer_type
or enumeral_type or boolean_type or real_type or
fixed_point_type, have pointer_type in builtin_memr
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83392
--- Comment #1 from Martin Liška ---
Let me take a look.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83356
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83463
--- Comment #1 from Markus Trippelsdorf ---
int *a;
void *memcpy();
void m(void *p1) { memcpy(0, p1, 0); }
void p() {
m(p + (long)a);
}
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83463
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83463
--- Comment #3 from Marek Polacek ---
I'd expect this to fix it:
--- a/gcc/gimple-ssa-warn-restrict.c
+++ b/gcc/gimple-ssa-warn-restrict.c
@@ -287,13 +287,15 @@ builtin_memref::builtin_memref (tree expr, tree size)
else
{
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83356
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83464
Bug ID: 83464
Summary: [SH] ICE: in final_scan_insn, at final.c:3025 with
-mlra
Product: gcc
Version: 7.2.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Prior
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83464
--- Comment #1 from John Paul Adrian Glaubitz ---
Created attachment 42901
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=42901&action=edit
Preprocessed source of GraphicsContext3DQt.cpp
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83464
--- Comment #2 from John Paul Adrian Glaubitz ---
Created attachment 42902
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=42902&action=edit
Generated assembly for GraphicsContext3DQt.cpp
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83411
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |marxin at gcc dot
gnu.org
--- Com
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59521
--- Comment #17 from Martin Liška ---
Unfortunately I decided to postpone it to GCC 9.x.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55189
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83266
--- Comment #4 from Yibiao Yang ---
(In reply to Martin Liška from comment #3)
> (In reply to Yibiao Yang from comment #1)
> > I am not very sure whether this is a bug or it is only the default behavior
> > in gcov.
> >
>
> Yes, it's expected.
3,3,2
cmpwi 7,10,256
mtctr 9
add 3,3,8
li 9,42
blt 7,.L7
.L3:
stw 9,0(3)
addi 3,3,-1024
bdnz .L3
blr
.L7:
li 10,1
mtctr 10
b .L3
.size foo, .-foo
$ ./powerpc-elf-gcc --version
powerpc-elf-gcc
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83356
--- Comment #3 from Richard Biener ---
Well, there's nothing we can do here if PRE decides to do more now (the
possible effect of the fix). We are simply finding a _lot_ more opportunities
to hoist/PRE stuff (all sanitizer stuff...). And PRE ha
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83463
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |8.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83462
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||msebor at gcc dot gnu.org
Comp
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83460
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target||x86_64-*-*, i?86-*-*
Status
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83459
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||ice-checking
Target Milestone|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83434
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83356
--- Comment #4 from Jakub Jelinek ---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #3)
(I believe they eventually abort (), right?) so we can't
Well, not abort, either runtime error message + die, or runtime error message +
continue, or __builtin_tr
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83452
--- Comment #3 from dave.anglin at bell dot net ---
On 2017-12-18 3:56 AM, rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
> Do you use GNU ld? hpux is using dwarf?
No, I'm using HP ld. 64-bit hpux is ELF and uses dwarf.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83411
--- Comment #3 from Hannes Hauswedell ---
I agree that the problem is related, I don't however think that solving PR82625
will solve the problem, as it would require me to multiversion every function
in my part of the subgraph, or not?
i.e.: giv
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80791
--- Comment #3 from amker at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to Aldy Hernandez from comment #2)
> Confirmed. Any update on this amker?
>
> Started with:
>
> commit a9b41911523c1db8042f1f38d1ed814326ef
> Author: amker
> Date: Thu May 11 09:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83356
--- Comment #5 from Arnd Bergmann ---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #3)
> That said, can't see an easy workaround but to change the source and/or
> not use -fsanitize= and expect decent code quality.
I don't see a good way to modify
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83356
--- Comment #6 from rguenther at suse dot de ---
On Mon, 18 Dec 2017, jakub at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83356
>
> --- Comment #4 from Jakub Jelinek ---
> (In reply to Richard Biener from comment #3)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83465
Bug ID: 83465
Summary: [GCOV] local struct const array variable is wrongly
marked as not executed in gcov
Product: gcc
Version: 7.2.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severi
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83356
--- Comment #7 from Jakub Jelinek ---
(In reply to rguent...@suse.de from comment #6)
> On Mon, 18 Dec 2017, jakub at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
>
> > https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83356
> >
> > --- Comment #4 from Jakub Jelinek ---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83452
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83448
David Malcolm changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83279
--- Comment #19 from Jonathan Wakely ---
I forgot about that. I'll need to put the offset value back and then add a seek
to the input streambuf.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83460
--- Comment #2 from Martin Sebor ---
I suspect this is the result of r255753. The test searches the dump of code
that depends on which changed in the revision to both avoid warnings
and improve the emitted code. To avoid these kinds of effects
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83239
--- Comment #19 from Martin Sebor ---
Right. Please see my comment in pr83460.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83460
Jeffrey A. Law changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||law at redhat dot com
--- Comment #3 fr
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80791
--- Comment #4 from seurer at gcc dot gnu.org ---
I am using a very simple configuration:
--enable-languages=c,fortran,c++ --with-cpu=power8 --disable-bootstrap
I tried it without specifying a cpu as well and got the same results.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83444
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83460
--- Comment #4 from Martin Sebor ---
(In reply to Jeffrey A. Law from comment #3)
> I am a bit concerned though. Didn't these failures show up during your
> regression testing Martin?
I just ran the libstdc++ tests for this change. It didn't o
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83466
Bug ID: 83466
Summary: Wrong TLS GD sequence for ILP32
Product: gcc
Version: 8.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: target
As
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80791
--- Comment #5 from seurer at gcc dot gnu.org ---
FYI: I am testing on native powerpc64 hardware and tried this on both power7
and power8 systems.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83237
Ed Smith-Rowland <3dw4rd at verizon dot net> changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||3dw4rd at v
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83460
--- Comment #5 from H.J. Lu ---
(In reply to Martin Sebor from comment #4)
> (In reply to Jeffrey A. Law from comment #3)
> > I am a bit concerned though. Didn't these failures show up during your
> > regression testing Martin?
>
> I just ran t
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59930
--- Comment #4 from Nathan Sidwell ---
Author: nathan
Date: Mon Dec 18 16:30:58 2017
New Revision: 255780
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=255780&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
[PR c++/59930] template friend injection
https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-pat
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59930
Nathan Sidwell changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83239
--- Comment #20 from Jeffrey A. Law ---
Yes. Very much want to keep this open -- I've got a patch for the missed
optimization, but need to recover the tests I'd written and somehow lost before
submitting.
1 - 100 of 194 matches
Mail list logo
